Slashdot Mirror
Next Goals For The ESA
zeux writes "With all the news we got recently from space I tried to gather some information about the next goals of the ESA (European Space Agency). Along with a space vehicle designed to carry supplies to the ISS between 2004 and 2013, they are working on the new 'Vega' launcher (2006) and still playing with the SMART-1 probe which is slowly heading to the moon testing an ion drive that is ten times more efficient than the usual chemical systems (1500 hours cumulated thrust time so far)."
Well considering that ESA's budget is about $5 billion (vs NASA's $17 billion), that the ESA has yet to land a spacecraft on any planetary body, that ESA has yet to build a rover, that there are intense political struggles within the organization, and that there are likely to be more budget cuts, its not suprising that ESA is slow as hell to do *anything*. NASA got where it is today (where most people think NASA might be the only competent government agency in the US) by being extraordinarily sucessful in its early programs. Contrast this with the Russians and look where they're at. ESA hasn't had much sucess lately (due to the Arianne and Beagle 2 fiascos), and really needs to rebuild public confidence in them. Smart people want to work for NASA because they feel they can make a difference. At the ESA they won't feel that way because there is so far little pride in the agency and too much political infighting.
I just don't understand why the old method of reaction mass rockets is still being used. There are several ways of giving an object velocity without reaction mass, as some term "inertia drives". They DO exist so why are they ignored by mainstream science? Google for yourself. The simplist method is a tube, bouncing a mass off a spring and letting it go clunk at the other end. Energy is applied to accelerate the mass for both directions. The difference in directional energy is obtained from the fact that when the mass goes klunk energy is lost through deformation etc. You don't have to take my word for it, use your brain, analyse the forces. Then you can wonder why we still use reaction mass rockets.